Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests/Third Opinion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcuts:
Please read before requesting for a third opinion
Third opinion (3O) is a means to request an outside opinion in a dispute between two editors. When two editors do not agree, either editor may list a discussion here to seek a third opinion. The third opinion process requires observance of good faith and civility from both editors during the discussion in order to be successful.

The less formal nature of the third opinion process is a major advantage over other methods of resolving disputes. For more complex disputes that involve more than two editors, or that cannot be resolved through talk page discussion, editors should follow the other steps in the dispute resolution process such as the dispute resolution noticeboard or request for comment.

Some disputes may involve both content issues as well as issues regarding the conduct of an editor. In such cases, the third opinion request should be framed in terms of content issues, even if the conduct of an editor is also at issue. For disputes that are exclusively about an editor's conduct and are not related to a content issue, other forums may be more appropriate such as the administrators noticeboard or a request for comment on user conduct. If in doubt, post your request here at third opinion and a neutral editor will help out.

To request a Third Opinion, visit the Third Opinion Project and follow the instructions there. Dispute resolution requests provides a central compilation of and an easy-access overview for Wikipedia:Dispute resolution (WP:DR), and details the various different methods used at each of the Wikipedia WP:DR requests pages

Dispute Resolution Requests (article content)

Third opinion

Noticeboards

Requests for comment

Third opinion Specialised noticeboards Requests for comment
Request an outside opinion when there is a content dispute between two users. Ask questions and request assistance from users familiar with the content policies and guidelines relevant to that notice board. Request input on a specific content issue from a broad number of uninvolved users.

Dispute resolution noticeboard

Formal mediation

Dispute resolution noticeboard Formal mediation
File a request for a moderated discussion regarding an ongoing content dispute that can't be resolved through discussion on the article talk page. Apply for formal mediation in an attempt to resolve a protracted content dispute that remains unresolved despite other attempts at dispute resolution.
Unsure which one to use? Check out our guide to dispute resolution, or ask at the talk page.


Dispute Resolution Requests (user conduct)

Sockpuppet investigations

Edit warring noticeboard

Administrators' noticeboard intervention

Sockpuppet investigations Edit warring noticeboard Administrators' noticeboard intervention
Place to file an investigation to find out whether two or more Wikipedia accounts are being abusively operated by the same person. Noticeboard for reporting users who are actively edit warring and/or have violated the three-revert rule. Request assistance from administrators and experienced users on the English Wikipedia regarding recent or ongoing misconduct by a fellow user.

Referred for comment/User

Arbitration

Requests for comment/User Arbitration and Arbitration Enforcement
Request comments from users regarding the problematic behavior of a specific editor who may have violated policies and guidelines. Apply to the Arbitration Committee for an examination and binding decision regarding a long standing issue of mis-conduct after all other avenues of dispute resolution have been exhausted. Or request enforcement against a user who you feel is acting in breach of the remedies described in a closed arbitration case.
Unsure which one to use? Check out our guide to dispute resolution, or ask at the talk page.